You all are great and I agree that all good things come from God and are given to each at the perfect time, including His Holy Written Word.

I was wondering who originally stamped these 66 books with the Divine seal of endorsment? I mean why these 66 books? I agree they are it, the Guiding Text, The Bible, but can we trace back to see why just these 66 books and who did God use to say these are it?

Jerm

You all are great and I agree that all good things come from God and are given to each at the perfect time, including His Holy Written Word.

I was wondering who originally stamped these 66 books with the Divine seal of endorsment? I mean why these 66 books? I agree they are it, the Guiding Text, The Bible, but can we trace back to see why just these 66 books and who did God use to say these are it?

cp

The process of canonization took place over a long period of time. For the first Christians, all they had were the Hebrew Scriptures (Note: By the 1st Century, there was still no definitive Hebrew canon.) Through out the 1st and the beginning of the 2nd Centuries, the writings that currently comprise our New Testament, as well as what we now refer too as the Apostolic Fathers, were written and used as Scripture. Eventually, heretical writings and doctrines began to sprout up, so the Church began the process of weeding out which writings were acceptable and which weren't (Note: They were attempting to put together a "Bible" so much as determine which individual writings would be deemed acceptable as Scripture. Remember, the Bible is not so much a book as it is a small library.) They didn't really have a check list but the basic prerequisites were Apostolic (Written by an Apostle during the Apostolic Age,) Orthodoxy (In agreement with the basic teachings of the Church i.e. the Rule of Faith,) and Catholicity (Used by Christians over a wide area and not just one specific location.) The first time our exact, current canon was listed by anyone was in 367 A.D. in Athanasius' 39th Festal Letter and the first time a council listed it was at the Council of Hippo in 393 A.D. Still, debates went for centuries afterwords. As far as what was accepted earliest on, you have the Hebrew Scriptures, the Gospels, Acts, the Letters of Paul, 1 Peter, and 1 John. All of the others writings were disputed for some reason or another but by the Mid 4th century, our current canon became predominant.

This info from reFORMer seems very note-worthy - "The temple menorah, the candlestick has 66 parts. Filled with oil, this stylized almond tree is upon what the fire burns in the holy place. It provides the light in the holy place. In us it is the Word (lampstand) that is the body of the anointing (oil.)"

God's hand in the 66 books, working through frail mankind to do His bidding? I'd think so. To me it would appear more than a coincidence. My .

Not to be confrontive here Card but you would be exactly where God intended you to be 'without it'. But you do make me see that the Bible is another vehicle that God 'drives' to get His will done and that's good enough for me.

Paul Hazelwood

I think a better question would be, "Where would we be without it?" I know where I was before I knew Him and learned of His ways........lost in a sea of darkness.......Blessings.....

I'm trying to respect Jabs warning, so if this lands me in trouble, so be it, because if I cannot be honest about what I think and where I am at, then I am not being me I am being what someone else wants me to be.

I think we can appreciate when we learn to find the good in the bible as opposed to reading it as some do in order to only discredit it. However, I think those who want only to discredit it have been hurt severely by how it is often used in religion.

Other points of view can use the bible in so called reverence, but through some of them, they only damage us spiritually and emotionally.

As a young boy I remember having ideals about things that later in life I find are in the bible, these things were not from reading the bible. Such as thinking someone was around me that made me feel good but I could not see them. I also do not think everything we can know spiritually is in the bible. This does not mean the bible is useless, only that there is more.

My parents assumed I was talking about ghosts and made every effort to say that it was all my imagination, as I grew older and was conformed more emotionally to certain people they drove these things deep down to where I conformed to their point of view because I believed that kept them from hating me for not believing as they did.

Not much has changed, really, the bible is used many ways to impose guilt and fear and warnings into those who would dare not see the bible in the same light as someone else. I see aggression from those who think someone has offended their God and beliefs and that person must be dealt with.

I am glad I am free to view any book however I see it and accept whatever might happen for believing that. This freedom is more important than someones set of rules.

Really, I think way too much credit is given to Constantine and the conventions in Rome. After all, they later burned the library at Alexandria and routinely killed, ejected and persecuted everyone who disagreed with their conclusions on a wide array of very dubious doctrinal mutations. The martyrdom of the saints of the ages, and the suppression of most of the foundational truths of the true Bride and Body of Christ can be traced to the Nicene convention as well. It was there where a group of bishops who had been in a seesaw struggle for power for over a century, a battle evolved involving intrigue, assassinations and persecutions against each other- a battle only nominally about doctrine. It was primarily about influence with the "christian" Ceasars. According to Josephus, only about one quarter of the bishops invited to the Nicene convention went- and their way was payed, round trip with lodging for anyone who wanted to accept the invite. Maybe those who didn't go knew it was a set up. After all, bishops who refused to sign were threatened with anathema, expulsion from the empire (a dire fate in those days of barbarianism), imprisonment and death.

I believe in the cannon as it is- but I personally believe it was congealing long before the fourth century. The councils were only recognizing a previous historic course. In any case, the histories written by the perpetrators of massive crimes must be read with a bit of reserve. Cain's history would have read differently than Abel's, but then, Abel had no time to write one- he was too busy dying. It was only because of education, renaissance and revolt against the Roman heel of spiritual, political and ideological dominion that the scriptures were ever translated, printed and distributed to the public. For me, the scriptures themselves are all the testimony I need that somehow, God, who works all things according to the counsel of His will- did just that, triumphing again over time and man's futility. The burning in my heart is my confirmation.

I think a better question would be, "Where would we be without it?" I know where I was before I knew Him and learned of His ways........lost in a sea of darkness.......Blessings.....

I'm trying to respect Jabs warning, so if this lands me in trouble, so be it, because if I cannot be honest about what I think and where I am at, then I am not being me I am being what someone else wants me to be.

I think we can appreciate when we learn to find the good in the bible as opposed to reading it as some do in order to only discredit it. However, I think those who want only to discredit it have been hurt severely by how it is often used in religion.

Other points of view can use the bible in so called reverence, but through some of them, they only damage us spiritually and emotionally.

As a young boy I remember having ideals about things that later in life I find are in the bible, these things were not from reading the bible. Such as thinking someone was around me that made me feel good but I could not see them. I also do not think everything we can know spiritually is in the bible. This does not mean the bible is useless, only that there is more.

My parents assumed I was talking about ghosts and made every effort to say that it was all my imagination, as I grew older and was conformed more emotionally to certain people they drove these things deep down to where I conformed to their point of view because I believed that kept them from hating me for not believing as they did.

Not much has changed, really, the bible is used many ways to impose guilt and fear and warnings into those who would dare not see the bible in the same light as someone else. I see aggression from those who think someone has offended their God and beliefs and that person must be dealt with.

I am glad I am free to view any book however I see it and accept whatever might happen for believing that. This freedom is more important than someones set of rules.

The motive of my heart was not to express any of the things you mentioned here, nor was it aggression. I simply have my own point of view, from my own experience with it, and this is it.

Nor have I ever said anything about not being able to learn spiritual things from elsewhere, but I maintain that the Word is like a plumbline; if something does not edify the original pattern, then it is discarded. It's also like a key that is a catylyst for unlocking the spiritual treasure we have in these earthen vessels.

I know from my own experience, that the morning after my late night "conversion", I was changed and had an immediate desire to read the Word, which I had never done before. The Spirit is not divided, so I know by experience that it was the desire of the Spirit (to put me in the Word).

It is a constantly-revealing-itself wonder to me, with depths that seem to be deeper and deeper all the time. Without it, I would be clueless (as before) of the majestic intricacies of His expression of His will and purpose, and of our part in it. Blessings....

Logged

"I would rather train twenty men to pray, than a thousand to preach; A minister's highest mission ought to be to teach his people to pray." -H. MacGregor

I think a better question would be, "Where would we be without it?" I know where I was before I knew Him and learned of His ways........lost in a sea of darkness.......Blessings.....

I'm trying to respect Jabs warning, so if this lands me in trouble, so be it, because if I cannot be honest about what I think and where I am at, then I am not being me I am being what someone else wants me to be.

I think we can appreciate when we learn to find the good in the bible as opposed to reading it as some do in order to only discredit it. However, I think those who want only to discredit it have been hurt severely by how it is often used in religion.

Other points of view can use the bible in so called reverence, but through some of them, they only damage us spiritually and emotionally.

As a young boy I remember having ideals about things that later in life I find are in the bible, these things were not from reading the bible. Such as thinking someone was around me that made me feel good but I could not see them. I also do not think everything we can know spiritually is in the bible. This does not mean the bible is useless, only that there is more.

My parents assumed I was talking about ghosts and made every effort to say that it was all my imagination, as I grew older and was conformed more emotionally to certain people they drove these things deep down to where I conformed to their point of view because I believed that kept them from hating me for not believing as they did.

Not much has changed, really, the bible is used many ways to impose guilt and fear and warnings into those who would dare not see the bible in the same light as someone else. I see aggression from those who think someone has offended their God and beliefs and that person must be dealt with.

I am glad I am free to view any book however I see it and accept whatever might happen for believing that. This freedom is more important than someones set of rules.

The motive of my heart was not to express any of the things you mentioned here, nor was it aggression. I simply have my own point of view, from my own experience with it, and this is it.

Nor have I ever said anything about not being able to learn spiritual things from elsewhere, but I maintain that the Word is like a plumbline; if something does not edify the original pattern, then it is discarded. It's also like a key that is a catylyst for unlocking the spiritual treasure we have in these earthen vessels.

I know from my own experience, that the morning after my late night "conversion", I was changed and had an immediate desire to read the Word, which I had never done before. The Spirit is not divided, so I know by experience that it was the desire of the Spirit (to put me in the Word).

It is a constantly-revealing-itself wonder to me, with depths that seem to be deeper and deeper all the time. Without it, I would be clueless (as before) of the majestic intricacies of His expression of His will and purpose, and of our part in it. Blessings....

I never said that you did any of the things you said you didn't do and your free to see the bible in the light you see it. I was pointing out where I was before I really knew anything the bible said.

The bible has not been the same for me as it has been for you. While the bible is great and I like reading it, from my perspective, there are many things I'd have preferred to not have been in my life because of it, none of those things really have anything to do with the bible being wrong, or God being bad, only how people often carry it.

Card I had a similar experience with Scripture as you upon my own inward conversion back in the mid-nineties. I had this extremely strong urge to read every spare moment that I had. I ended up reading the bible clear through in lest than 3 months time. I often wondered why this happened and later felt the Lord revealed to me the reason was that I had been so dry for so long that once I finally allowed him to flow in, I absorbed his word like a sponge.

Now, having said that, I also think that we're to mature from one level to another, to another and so on. so that on one level, I embraced every word written. I grew with them and relied on them to support me through struggles and weaknesses. But then as I grew, I still referred to them, but not as literally as I originally did in the beginning.

And now, I still read and preach out of it, but it's purpose has changed along with my relationship with the Father. I still read it, I still refer to it, but I "rely" on the voice of the spirit "in" me rather than on what my mind interpets between the covers of a book.

Also, as we've seen in some of the comments as to "when" the Bible came to be the Bible as we know it . .incidentally, there were several rough drafts before it became what it is now. And even now, not every belief system goes by it. the Catholics still add some other books in their Bible that the general canon has exempted. And the Mormons kind of have a bait and switch kind of thing going where they encourage new comers to read the standard canon, but once you're in their membership, they change the emphasis to another book that turns the attention to their founder instead of embracing Christ as the "one" Lord.

Before the Bible took any form at all, the gospel went out and turned the world upside down based on word of mouth and personal experiences. As educated as Paul was, he didn't carry a Thompson Chain reference Bible around with him and yet he effectively spread the Gospel that has affected generation after generation.

Hi Paul. Thanks. It sounds to me like the Bible was used, as one vehicle, to reinforce what was already in someone's (unfortunately, your parents) heart - whatever the source of that was. Blessings to you on your jouney of recovery from that.

About anything can be used properly and for good, or misused for harm and destruction. I believe that's from the condition of the human heart (or mentally ill mind, etc.) - and though the Words of God are obviously good, a demented mind can twist them and hurt with them.

Jerm

No offense to anyone, but I think that Protestants have placed WAY too much undue and misdirected emphasis on Constantine and the Council of Nicaea. The Council of Nicaea had nothing to do with Scripture nor was it a vehicle for Constantine for shape Christianity as he saw fit. Rather the Council was meant to resolve the Arian controversy that was splitting the Church apart at the time. Constantine merely served as the moderator, not the final word.

On that note, it is true that Constantine's legalization of Christianity changed the course of the Church forever, he did not form it to the degree attributed to him. Many of the practices and ideas attributed to the "First Pope" were around well before his birth, let alone conversion. And yes, the merger of Church and Empire resulted in horrendous power struggles based on political agendas, the full force of this shift began forming much later.